Technology

83534 readers

1747 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

400

AI Company Clones Musician’s Voice, Then Copyright-Strikes Her Own Songs (rudevulture.com)

submitted 6 hours ago by 0x0@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As crappy as it sounds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Carmakazi@piefed.social 120 points 6 hours ago (6 children)

We need an assumed and exclusive right to our own likenesses and fast.

[–] mschae@discuss.mschae23.de 99 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

We do, AI companies just don't respect it.

[–] hayvan@piefed.world 4 points 1 hour ago

More importantly, platforms don't respect it. Any malicious outside actor shouldn't be allowed to their malice.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 19 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Doesn't even matter. The systems they built for copyright enforcement are absolute shit and easily abused if you have a lot of money, as designed. And with AI added to the mix, it's all automated so none of it will work ad it should and they don't care to fix it. Disney or whoever can just launch constant copyright claims and cripple small IP owners even when they're completely ok the wrong.

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 1 points 22 minutes ago

If we all know this why hasn't there been a class action lawsuit, and don't give me the arbitration keeps people from trying. As we have learned with this American administration, do it fast enough that the courts can't respond amd maybe you can force it.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 hours ago

That is the truth.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 15 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Beware: AI companies really want to sell a terrible solution to the problem they created.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Didn't Denmark do something along those lines recently?

[–] FrederikNJS@piefed.zip 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yep

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

Wouldn’t be the first one to post the content bias, the algorithm in your favor?

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz -2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Lets not throw out freedom of panorama because of AI.

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What does that have to do with anything here?? I don't know about you, but my likeness is not permanently located in a public space...

Freedom of panorama (FoP) is a provision in the copyright laws of various jurisdictions that permits taking photographs and video footage and creating other images (such as paintings) of buildings and sometimes sculptures and other art works which are permanently located in a public space, without infringing on any copyright that may otherwise subsist in such works, and the publishing of such images.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I'm not sure of the correct term. It should be obvious though that if anyone can copyright claim their own image, it would basically make taking photos in many public places impossible.

[–] stray@pawb.social 1 points 1 hour ago

It's not impossible at all. You just have to blur the faces unless you've obtained explicit consent. Kind people already do this regularly.